Some Empirical Issues in the Grammar of Extraction

This paper compares transformation-based and constraint-based treatments of unbounded filler-gap dependencies, the latter specifically as articulated in terms of HPSG, and argues, contrary to the commonly made allegations of ‘notational variance’, that there is purely empirical evidence that is consistent with only the constraint-based account. Recent proposals to deal with parasitic gaps in terms of null pronominals and ‘empty operators’ are unable to account for the phenomenon of ‘symbiotic’ gaps, the apparent case mismatches found in parasitic gap constructions, or (in general) for the well-known ‘across-the-board’ effects within coordinate structures. 1 Filler/Gap Constructions: Two Approaches Historically, filler/gap constructions (or unbounded dependency constructions – UDCs) such as those in (1) have been approached two ways: (1) a. THAT book, you should purchase . b. Which book does Leslie think you should purchase ? c. This is the book which Leslie told me she thinks I should purchase . Transformational approaches posit a sequence of representations in which the filler is initially in the position notated by the underline in (1), which is then relocated, possibly via a series of movement steps, to its final position on the left of the highest clause. Schematically, the derivational approach can be illustrated in (2): The ideas presented here are developed in greater detail in Levine and Sag 2003. We would like to thank John Beavers for comments on an earlier draft. We also thank a number of people, discussions with whom have had an influence on the ideas presented here. These include John Beavers, Emily Bender, Mike Calcagno, Jonathan Ginzburg, Takao Gunji, Tom Hukari, David Johnson, Shalom Lappin, Carl Pollard, Tom Wasow, and two anonymous reviewers. A special thanks is due Gerald Gazdar, whose ideas we have built on in fundamental ways. Finally, this paper was prepared while Sag was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, supported by a grant (# 2000-5633) to CASBS from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.